North Korea Human Rights Watch C/o David B Malik

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831713402
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Solon, OH, USA
Phone
4407298260
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$365,913
Expenses
$372,017
Assets
$7,870
Liabilities
$51,604

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SEUNG WOO KANG (PROGRAM DIRE): $80,000 total reported compensation
  • DAVID B MALIK (CHIEF OPERAT): $30,000 total reported compensation
  • JAMES KELMAN (CHAIR): $24,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of north korea human rights watch is to assist the people of north korea through programs that are exclusively for eductional or charitable purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3)of the internal revenue code.

What it reported doing in 2022

Program services: the development of age appropriate educational content in north korean and english language for the purpose of illustrating time honored western concepts related to democracy, human rights and rule of law. This has been accomplished through the linkage of both domestic and institutional partners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $114.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.56; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.8% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $296K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.